Search

When Joseph Lubenstein walked into airplane engine giant Pratt & Whitney on his first day of work as a new aerospace engineer in 1970, he had no idea what an engineer actually did. Fresh from college, Lubenstein had logged plenty of time in classrooms, but none on a shop floor.

While hands-on experience now is considered essential to students’ education, companies that offer internships most often seek out undergraduates rather than high-school students.

But Lubenstein, now retired from engineering and education, knows the benefits of early on-the-job training and now devotes his time to helping arrange internships, mentorships and shadow programs for students at the Academy of Aerospace and Engineering, a grade 6-12 magnet school in Windsor, Connecticut. The academy focuses on science, technology, engineering and mathematics (STEM) courses. 

Giving kids real-world experience in  STEM 

“Kids say it helps them think through the whole area of career selection,” said Lubenstein, a former director of the school and retired president of Kaman Corporation. “They get out and see what a shop floor looks like more now and it gives them exposure to production and business processes, so they get to see other aspects of work.” Students who interned at The Jackson Laboratory in Farmington, Connecticut, for example, learned about the application of computational biology. “Kids saw how they could deploy math in ways they had not thought of.”

Capitalizing on his years in the industry, Lubenstein forged relationships with executives at many of the area’s aerospace and technical companies and colleges. “Initially, companies were more interested in college students, but lately they have been more accepting [of secondary school students],” he said. “I did a lot of work to connect students with internships, summer jobs, and career symposiums and bring in upper management from finance, medicine, computer science and engineering.” 

The school’s advisory board is a who’s who of industry leaders. “We treat them [advisory board members] as our advocates within their companies,” Lubenstein continued. “The key is finding a motivated manager and keeping them motivated to participate. The fact that they [managers] are motivated gives us the best shot at keeping a relationship alive.”

Mentoring can help build young students' job prospects

Kaman employees, for example, have mentored eighth-grade students for several years and GKN Aerospace provides mentors for ninth graders. During the school year, students visit the company twice a month and spend about 90 minutes each visit with their mentors, working on projects they decide would be productive.

High-school students can apply for summer internships when they are 16. They must prepare resumes and participate in a formal interview process. About 25 students each summer are hired. 

While many companies draw interns from the college-age pool, Bristol, Connecticut-based Barnes Group Inc. is similarly focused on developing strong relationships with students of all ages, said James Pelletier, deputy general counsel of the Barnes Group Inc., and general counsel of Barnes Aerospace. Last year Barnes had interns in its manufacturing facilities and in its functional groups such as health and safety, contracts and engineering. “We believe it’s important to support the development of STEM education to ensure a strong and diverse talent pipeline in the communities in which we operate,” he said. “As students make early career decisions, we are in a position to both positively influence those career choices, and also offer them key learning opportunities and potentially future employment choices at Barnes.”

Academy students who interned at Barnes demonstrate strong analytical and problem solving skills and have experience with the latest digital and data analytics technology, Pelletier added.   

Building relationships can make a difference for students interested in STEM

“Because U.S.-based companies are competing for top technically-trained talent across the country, we think it is key, now more than ever, to develop relationships with students early on,” he continued. “You build relationships by exposing them to real challenges where they can make real contributions to your business.”

Nearly 4 in 5 STEM college students, for example, report that they became interested in STEM fields while in high school or earlier. (More educators today are adding arts to the mix, and calling the subject cluster STEAM). 

The Academy of Aerospace and Engineering stresses its hands-on opportunities to potential students. The school is part of a continuum of STEM studies that begins with pre-kindergarten students. In 2019, 73 of the first graduates of the pre-k-to-grade 5 Academy of Aerospace and Engineering Elementary School in Rocky Hill, Connecticut, enrolled at the secondary school. 

Most of the students are selected by lottery. The secondary school has a long waiting list. “This shows the demand for high-quality, integrated STEAM education,” said Adam Johnson, the secondary school principal.  “We need to invest in public schools and programs that promote STEM [or STEAM.]”  

The academies are part of a group of specialized magnet schools created by state entities in an effort to reduce racial and economic isolation in urban districts, particularly Hartford. The secondary school enrolls approximately 800 students from 42 towns; about 50 percent are from Hartford. At least half the students are black or Hispanic. “We provide a high-quality STEAM education in a racially-integrated learning environment,” according to Johnson. “We find ways to embed [the STEAM] thought process right from the start. We want to create problem-solving, creative thinkers, who can use their innovative skill set to address the world’s foremost challenges. The goal of what they learn is to make the world better for everyone, whether it is studying the lack of water or climate change.” 

Most academy graduates go on to college, studying the sciences, engineering, computer science or programming or aerospace manufacturing. Some join the military or pursue a trade. “A lot of kids already are interested in this stuff; what matters is making hands-on and engaging activities for kids,” added Johnson. “If we care about them, we need a sustainable pipeline in these areas of study; we need to invest in youth.”

Image credit: Eric Bruton/Unsplash

Picture this: A chicken factory farm with overcrowded hens packed onto the cement floor with a higher risk for disease and without good-quality feed or even fresh air. Now, picture this: Family farms that provide their pasture-raised hens with plenty of feed, nutrients and abundant space to forage for seeds, grass and protein-packed critters in luscious pastures.

Actually, you don’t have to picture it: Vital Farms egg customers can now watch and hear the clucking chickens on a 360-degree video on the company’s website. According to the Austin-based company, offering consumers such a view of how these egg farms operate is an industry first.

Vital Farms gives customers a 360-degree view of egg farms

Vital Farms partners with about 200 U.S. farms and lists the farm of origin on every egg carton. Customers can then search out the farm online to view the video. Prompts on the Vital Farms’ website encourage viewers to crank up the volume to appreciate the clucking noise the chickens make as they scavenge in spacious pastures. A Featured Farm of the Month video is available for people who have not purchased eggs but want to check out the videos.

The Featured Farm of the Month video shows foraging hens roaming in and out of camera view that appear healthy (with smooth, full feathers and without visible wounds from pecking). Though the videos are not live, Vital Farms' welfare claims are third-party verified by Humane Farm Animal Care’s Certified Humane standards.

Going far beyond cage-free to pasture-raised eggs

It’s one thing for a company to say its animals are treated humanely. It’s another thing to actually film such efforts.

To that end, Vital Farms says it’s on a mission "to bring ethically-produced food to the table." One of the ways the company seeks to accomplish this goal is by ensuring that every egg is laid by a pasture-raised hen. These hens roam 108 or more square feet of pastureland and are brought indoors at sunset for their safety from predators, according to the company. 

Vital Farms’ demonstration of traceability and transparency is indicative of the turnaround the U.S. egg industry has made over the past decade. Consumers who became appalled at how hens were treated have long been pressuring businesses to boost their animal welfare standards, and many of the largest U.S. retailers and restaurant chains have responded in kind. The evidence suggests this trend is continuing, albeit slowly, worldwide: Nestlé is among the companies that have committed to a cage-free eggy supply chain by 2025.

Vital Farms, however, is going even further with its pasture-raised commitment and worked with Certified Humane to develop a formal standard for the claim. The on-farm videos are a next step and give customers a window into how their eggs are produced.

Consumers are demanding to know how their food is sourced

A growing trend in America is a desire to understand how everyday food gets from farm to table. Technology certainly helps, but an industry commitment is important as well—and some sectors within the wider food industry have been more transparent than others. 

Vital Farms’ decision to become more transparent about how its eggs are sourced follows in the footsteps of other brands that have attempted to show consumers the origins of their food products. In the fall of 2017, for example, the brand Honeysuckle White allowed some customers in Texas to see where its Thanksgiving turkeys came from. In Australia, JBS launched a similar program late last year for beef customers.

But we are a long way off from watching cattle freely roam, or fish swim, on web cams—and in this way, Vital Farms is pushing the envelope on supply chain traceability and transparency.

Image credit: Vital Farms

“Creative PR.” That is how Greta Thunberg, de facto leader of the growing youth climate movement and Time magazine’s Person of the Year, brands corporate America’s attempts to mask inadequate ESG (environmental, social and governance) actions. She regularly accuses the business world of “misleading” people about the authenticity of their sustainability actions in comparison to the scale of their pollution.

As an economist and former CEO, I've spent days reading corporate ESG reports in an attempt to face her challenge. What I found was a glaring gap between their reported ESG achievements and the most basic reporting of financial results.

This type of reporting gap, if found within a public company’s 10K annual report (as mandated for publicly-owned companies by the U.S. Securities and Exchange Commission, or SEC), would raise serious questions of relevancy and materiality based on the accounting industry’s Generally Accepted Accounting Standards (GAAP). Such a gap in a financial report would have to be accounted for in accounting notes or it would not be certified.

Corporate America’s ESG relevancy gap is bad business because it opens the door to competition from disruptive entrepreneurs who win customers by aligning value with values. For example, the traditional food industry now confronts the competitive challenge as consumers gravitate toward meatless burgers sold through fast-food retailers that are price competitive, healthy, tasty and environmentally sustainable. Similarly, combustion turbine manufacturers are losing market share to solar and wind power. Renewable energy now represents half of new utility generating plant additions because it is least cost with zero emissions. And the auto industry is racing to catch up with Tesla, which outsells BMW and Mercedes combined because its all-electric cars deliver on price, performance and zero tailpipe emissions.

ESG initially linked value and values

Back in 2012, corporate America did link business and sustainability performance. One of my most read TriplePundit interviews was with Walmart’s Jeff Rice. What made this interview noteworthy was his linking of Walmart’s financial results to its sustainability initiatives. He powerfully summarized, “Sustainability absolutely supports everyday low prices.”

Rice also explained how Walmart was making over $200 million a year by converting what it used to throw away into cash. And he put forth a sustainable vision, describing Walmart’s self-fulfilling cycle of making money through sustainability action and using this cash flow to invest in additional sustainable best practices that would generate even more money.

But something has changed since 2012. I reached out to Walmart for an update on the financial performance provided by Rice. The response from Walmart’s representative was that I should read the company's ESG report. I explained that I had and, finding little financial data, I was reaching out for help. Their next reply was that I should read Walmart's financial reports. I did. These reports offered little or no links between the company's reported ESG results and its financial results.

Thinking this might just be a Walmart issue, I then began reading other companies’ ESG reports. They were all like Walmart’s. A lot of aspirational goals and stand-alone sustainability performance with little or no context in terms of profitability or sales results. 

Relevancy: The bottom-line focus for ESG reporting

Corporate America is missing a huge business opportunity by not making their ESG reports relevant to consumers and investors. Their reporting fails the millennial generation’s search for businesses that are “cool with a purpose.” They are failing to materially link their financial goals to Generation Z’s demand for change.

How could ESG reporting satisfy expectations that millennials and Gen Z have?

One example would be Walmart reporting on how its California stores are growing sales and profitability within the context of the Golden State’s 2016 public referendum banning plastic bags. I count ten Walmart stores within ten miles of my home. Their parking lots are full of cars. This economist’s guess is that Walmart sales are booming—and realizing measurable cost savings from consumers adopting the sustainable best practice of using reusable bags.

Rather than providing insights that would really gather millennial and Gen Z attention, however, Walmart reports on its 2025 aspirational goals for reducing plastic waste. The retailer does note its current success in recycling 430 million pounds of plastic, but leaves readers to wonder what percentage this recycled plastic is when accounting for Walmart’s enterprise-scale plastic waste stream. The company is silent on how much money it saves from recycling and repurposing their waste streams.

This is just not a Walmart issue.

Corporate America’s continued market share and appeal to investors are at competitive risk if they continue to delink ESG reporting and financial results. This gap will be filled by disruptive entrepreneurship that delivers the authenticity millennials and Gen Z are demanding both at the cash register and within ESG reporting.

Image credit: Pixabay

Germany’s Bayer, Italy’s Eni, Switzerland’s Nestlé and Anglo-Dutch Unilever are rated “gold class among Europe’s 50 top listed companies in terms of how they combine their ESG (environmental, social and governance) progress and sustainability talk with “walking the walk” and executing on it.

New research from Lundquist, a corporate communications and sustainability agency based in Milan, has for the first time analyzed how European companies that are members of the STOXX Europe 50 Index position themselves in terms of ESG and sustainability. Researchers reviewed the English language content across corporate websites, social media channels and related digital properties (magazines, mini-sites, etc.).

In essence, the analysis provides a snapshot on how fit for purpose these entities are, as well as what consumers expect, what LinkedIn influencers want and what millennials aspire to see.

The agency’s research extends Lundquist’s horizons to examine how European corporates are interpreting the challenge of sustainability communications.

It measures communications from two connected perspectives—namely, substance (i.e. information that users need to understand about a company: the facts and figures defining the substance of what they do and why) and distinctiveness (tracking user experience and engagement, from stories and viewpoints to social media use).

Based on the findings, corporates were rated gold class, silver class, bronze class, “The Narrators”, “The Glitterati” (with a focus on what is visually striking and exploiting social channels to talk about sustainability) to “The Traditionalists” and “The Sleepers.”

The evaluation protocol consisted of seven sections, with a maximum possible score of 100. The research takes what is described as “a new, future-oriented perspective” built around real stakeholder expectations. Credible and concrete stories about sustainability examined.

Today, this mission is as “urgent as ever," driven by a “surging interest in sustainability and an expectation that business should articulate how it is contributing to our collective future challenges,” the researchers wrote. 

Top of class: ‘The Narrators’

Some leading corporates in Europe are shown to be paving the way and labelled "The Narrators,” whilst others are confined for now to “the bench”—to use a footballing term—or categorized as “The Sleepers.”

Nine of the 49 companies considered qualify as “narrators,” led by oil companies BP and Eni, consumer packaged goods brands Nestlé and Unilever, and healthcare firms Bayer and Roche. Almost all of them were found to have struck a balance between the perspectives of substance and distinctiveness.

The best companies in Europe were found to be managing to connect communications to the substance of the impacts of their business. This trend suggests that "companies are working hard not only to be relevant and engaging, but to make sure communication is backed up by the kind of robust evidence that users clamor for," said James Osborne, head of sustainability at Lundquist.

In respect to the “narrators,” Osborne added: “They exhibit a good balance between what they say and how they say it.” Almost all of them strike a balance between substance (45 points out of 100) and distinctiveness (55 out of 100), the two pillars analyzed for the research.

Companies rated ‘gold’ class, were those which scored at least 60 percent of maximum in both pillars. Those companies scoring at least 50 percent of maximum in both pillars but not qualifying as gold were rated silver (BASF, BP, Deutsche Telekom, National Grid and Roche in the latter class).

Bottom of the class: ‘The Sleepers’

Seven companies were rated "sleepers" and included ASML Holding, Lloyds Banking Group, LVMH, Prudential, Rio Tinto, Sanofi and Safran.

The analysis does not stress “rankings” in absolute terms as with Lundquist’s other studies such as the Web ranking for Top 500 European companies, seeking instead to show positioning of companies.

In respect of “The Traditionalists,” which comprise 14 companies including Airbus, Allianz, Anheuser-Busch InBev, Astra Zeneca, BNP Paribas and SAP, this was noted as the “most dangerous area” to be in for a company, as it “indicates the absence of a culture of transparency and attention to the digital user.”

These companies tended to focus on technical and compliance disclosure, but “without demonstrating a distinct corporate identity," researchers found. 

On the social media front, industrial gas company Linde scored the top spot for best use of sustainability communications on Facebook, while best use of Twitter for this purpose was clinched by Unilever, which generates more social engagement on social and environmental themes than on other topics, according to the research.

Image credit: Francesco Ungaro/Pexels

“Are you okay?” That is the whispered question I now receive from friends who have not seen me for a few years. They are really asking if I have cancer. They are reacting to seeing me 40 pounds lighter.

To allay their fears, I smile broadly and say, “I feel great.” And that is really true. I can run again. I am wearing a pant size I last wore in my twenties. Even better (and this will sound unbelievably false) I achieved this success while still enjoying pizza and Dairy Queen.

Rethinking our approach to healthy living and weight loss

But I have learned the hard way that telling someone you have figured out the weight loss “Holy Grail” only generates an “oh boy, Bill has gone off the deep end” look. It is the same look I got when I first began sounding the alarm about climate change.

I went to see my doctor after my wife wondered if I wasn’t fooling myself and that my weight loss might actually be due to something wrong with me. My doctor assured me I was in great health. He lamented that the reactions I was receiving represented how our culture had accepted plus sizes as the new norm.

As a behavioral economist, addiction is the best way I can explain why Americans are normalizing weight gain. This insight, which I gained a few years ago while researching a TriplePundit article series on our national obesity crisis, sparked me to write my latest book, The Boomer Generation Diet. 

The themes within this book address the contemplation stages in addressing addiction. Contemplation is a questioning process for visualizing what to change and how to change it. It is the first step in addressing addiction. The Boomer Generation Diet disruptively refutes the idea that hunger, denial and painful exercise is the path to weight loss. In addiction terms, going cold-turkey rarely works. This lifestyle change profiles 10 best practices to sustainable weight loss that still provides the type of pleasures provided by a weight-gaining addictive lifestyle.

It's about sustainable living, boomers

Where I screwed up was in entitling my book The Boomer Generation Diet. The goal was to help my generation confront their diabetics epidemic and a life sustained through medicines. Unfortunately, focusing the book’s title on the boomer generation missed what is now obvious: Weight gain is a national health crisis impacting all generations. Half of us are projected to be obese by 2030.

I also should have known better than to use the word “diet” in the book’s title. We hear the word diet and feel denial. I should have entitled the book something like The Sustainability Lifestyle for Having Fun and Living More. This type of title captures the book’s sizzle: There is a path for loving food, having fun and losing weight.

This same type of win/win message is now emerging as the solution for climate change and other environmental crises. We are moving past the failed idea that you have to give up fossil fuel-powered pickup trucks and SUVs to save the world. The emerging new message is that you will want to give up conventional trucks and SUVs because electric vehicles will have more torque, are faster, handle better, require little maintenance and are least cost over the life of the vehicle. (And in a few more years they will be competitive on their retail sticker prices.) We are entering what I would describe as a clean technology cost less, mean more mass-production cycle.

Consumers will flock to electric vehicles because, through mass production and technology innovations, they will cost less and be more fun to drive. And, oh by the way, they have zero tailpipe emissions. A similar story is unfolding with other sustainable lifestyle choices—they're simply more desirable, as well as more conscious. 

The exciting news of The Boomer Generation Diet is that the sustainability best practices that have begun delivering clean tech cost less, mean more results can also deliver weight loss while having fun and living more.

I am proof that you can lose weight, have fun and live more!

Image credit: Steve Buissinne/Pixabay

The Lego Foundation – the philanthropic arm of the company many of us know from our childhood days – is on a mission to reshape education for a generation of refugee children.

Last month, the Denmark-based foundation awarded $100 million to the International Rescue Committee (IRC) to promote play-based, early learning solutions for pre-primary and primary school-aged children impacted by the humanitarian crises in East Africa living in Ethiopia and Uganda, and potentially a third country in the region. The grant builds on a previous $100 million grant Lego awarded in 2018 to Sesame Workshop and its partners BRAC, IRC and New York University to develop, test and scale-up playful early learning solutions for the youngest most vulnerable children, birth to six years of age, impacted by the Syrian and Rohingya crises.

In a press release announcing this latest grant, the Foundation said the five-year project PlayMatters will help strengthen children’s resilience and help build their social, emotional, cognitive, physical and creative skills.

Through PlayMatters, Lego and the Lego Foundation are demonstrating one way the private sector can help address UN Sustainable Development Goal 4 -- Ensure inclusive and equitable quality education for all – as well as the Global Compact for Refugees’ request for the international community to support governments in finding durable solutions to the  refugee crisis.

Play-time crucial even in crisis situations

Lack of access to food, medicines and shelter – not play time – is often associated with the plight facing the world’s more than 70 million refugees. But experts say that play-based learning is a critical component for childhood learning and building the skills necessary to cope with adversity -- and one that is woefully neglected in crisis situations.

An estimated 31 million children have been displaced and now live in refugee camps. They’ve lost homes and loved ones, seen violence, and endured the kinds of trauma that put them at risk for lifelong impairments. Millions have no access to quality early learning. Yet less than 3 percent of all humanitarian aid goes to education, and only a tiny fraction of that to early childhood.

An article in the American Journal of Play found that it is through play that children first learn how to make decisions, solve problems, exert self-control, and follow rules. Play can also teach children how to handle their emotions, including anger and fear. In addition, play can help build the resilience children need to thrive in conflict settings.

“We know that investing in play-based learning interventions is key to addressing toxic stress and trauma for young children in refugee settings as learning through play helps to develop social and emotional skills, builds resilience, and strengthens brain connections essential for future development,” said John Goodwin, CEO of the LEGO Foundation. “The children in these largely forgotten crises in Ethiopia and Uganda deserve the power of learning through play and the hope that it can bring for a bright future.”

Together, IRC & Lego are reaching 800,000 children

IRC, together with local partners and the governments of Ethiopia and Uganda, plan to train approximately 10,000 pre-primary and primary school teachers and education personnel and 170,000 primary caregivers through PlayMatters. They will equip them with play-based solutions that they can integrate in classrooms and at home. In all, IRC and the Lego Foundation hope to improve education outcomes for approximately 800,000 children.

Sarah Smith, IRC’s senior director of education, told TriplePundit that IRC will work with the Lego Foundation to evaluate the success of the initiative and create a program that’s adaptable across Africa and beyond.

“We plan to work with local experts to understand what is working and what is not working, and through this research, we’ll assess progress against our broader goal of educating every refugee child,” said Smith. “Our ultimate goal is to create models that can travel to wherever there are children who aren’t getting the education that they need and deserve.”

Image credit: Embassy of Denmark in Uganda/Facebook

Reducing red meat consumption—and eating less meat in general, for that matter—is a regular staple on my New Year’s resolution list. And plenty of data suggest it’s become a more popular resolution in recent years.

A British nonprofit, Veganuary, has tried to make it more official. Since 2014, the organization has called on people worldwide to pledge to go vegan in the month of January, and hopefully beyond. In 2019, more than 800,000 people ate less meat and animal products for at least a month, according to a study conducted by the group. 

Cheerio, steak and kidney pie?

The food and agriculture industry is starting to see the effects of reduced meat consumption. Last year, red meat sales in the United Kingdom dropped by $242 million, or 185 million British pounds.

It may surprise some that Britain, the home of Beefeaters, Sunday roasts, and steak and kidney pies would be at the forefront of the vegetarian shift, but there is a long history there. The first vegetarian society in the modern western world was founded in 1847 in Ramsgate, England. During the European Enlightenment and early 19th century, vegetarianism was more accepted in England than anywhere else in Europe. Further, when I lived there 20 years ago, I remember seeing a lot more vegetarian options and friendliness toward meat-free eating than I saw in the U.S. at the time.

Health and cost savings top the list of reasons Britons are cutting back on meat consumption, but the environmental impact plays a role as well. Even in the U.S., where consumption of meat outstrips that of other western countries, there are signs of a shift. Sales of plant-based foods increased by 20 percent across the U.S. in 2018.

Attitudes toward red meat consumption shift on both sides of the pond

Climate action advocates surely welcome these trends. Last year, the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) recommended reducing meat consumption as a tool for combating climate change, and a new story seems to come out every week about going vegetarian—even part-time—as an environmental measure.

However, some recent studies indicate many meat substitutes may be detrimental to the environment. The news can be confusing to consumers, even as more people adopt a diet with less meat. The reality is: As consumers, we should all be more mindful of the costs of food production and the associated waste. There is a lot of water and energy burned in our food systems, and whether people choose a meat-free diet or not may be out of their hands if we start running out of water.

An overlooked reason to go plant-based: Meat production’s impact on water

For example, 80 percent of all water used in California is used by the agricultural sector. In addition to being unavailable for other uses, any water that is returned must be purified, an energy-intensive process, which, depending on the energy source, can also be water-intensive. Further, much of the food produced worldwide is wasted—around 25 percent—and with that, roughly 4.2 trillion gallons of water are lost.

The key is efficiency, both in food processing and our consumption. According to the U.N. Food and Agriculture Organization, 40 to 50 percent of fruits and vegetables are wasted, much before they even reach our shelves. In a visit to the U.K. two years ago, I was pleased to find imperfect vegetables not only sold in the local supermarket, but also marketed as such. Further, more efficient irrigation techniques and the deployment of low-water wind and solar power could reduce both the energy and water footprint of production, while next-generation warehouses and silos could prevent the spoilage and waste of food between the field and the supermarket.

Meat production and processing are heavy burdens on our food systems, and reducing consumption will likely have environmental benefits, from lower water and energy use to carbon and methane emissions reductions. But animal agriculture is only part of the problem of a larger conundrum of how to feed billions of people sustainably. Better data is needed across the energy-water-food nexus to increase efficiency. Being mindful of what we choose to eat is important, but like the industry, we should be taking a holistic view of the entire system.

Image credit: Pixabay

U-Haul made headlines last week after announcing the company will no longer hire nicotine users. This change will go into effect on February 1 in 21 states.

Based in Phoenix, U-Haul employs over 30,000 people in the U.S. and Canada. In states in which the policy will be enacted, job applicants will be questioned about nicotine use and will be subject to testing if allowable by state law.

This new hiring policy was met with opinions across the spectrum regarding whether it was a smart move by U-Haul or a cruel method of narrowing the pool of applicants for future positions.

The company stated that the policy was enacted to help maintain a “healthier workforce.” Jessica Lopez, U-Haul chief of staff, defended the policy by calling it a move to further the goals of the company’s health and wellness program, ABC15 Arizona reported.

"Each year it's been our mission to increase our wellness benefits program to help our workers and family members conquer their health goals,” Lopez said. “This nicotine-free hiring process is the next step.”      

Part of U-Haul’s health and wellness program includes programs designed to help people quit the use of nicotine products.

Opponents of the new policy maintain that refusing work to smokers is an “extreme” action and that employers are more concerned about their bottom line than the health of their employees.

Although many businesses choose to ban the act of smoking at the workplace rather than refuse to hire tobacco users, U-Haul is not the only company with a no-smokers policy for employees. Alaska Airlines has been turning smokers away as potential hires since 1985, and some hospitals and health businesses have also jumped on the bandwagon.

One of the main reasons that companies give for refusing to hire nicotine users is that the health of their employees is placed at a significant risk when there are smokers on-site. According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), 1 in 5 preventable deaths are caused by smoking (or 480,000 annually). Secondhand smoke also threatens the health of employees and clients or customers who visit the workplace.

In addition to the lost lives and compromised health that smoking causes, companies pay higher costs for smoking employees. According to a 2013 study conducted by Ohio State University, businesses pay approximately $6,000 more per year for each employee who smokes. These costs are associated with issues including lower productivity, absenteeism and healthcare costs. All totaled, smoking-related illnesses cost more than $300 billion in medical expenses and lost productivity each year in the U.S. alone, according to the CDC.

U-Haul is not the first company to implement a non-smoking policy for its new hires – and it won’t be the last. Watch for other companies to consider such a policy – along with a lively debate in traditional and social media between those who support and oppose such a policy.

Image credit: Mike Mozart/Flickr

Who is responsible for the wellbeing of subsistence cobalt miners in the Democratic Republic of Congo (DRC)? A lawsuit put forward on behalf of child miners and their families by International Rights Advocates (IRA), a legal advocacy firm, insists that the tech companies profiting by the billions, in large part due to cobalt supplies, should bear the responsibility.

Apple, Alphabet (Google’s parent company) and Tesla are among the companies being sued. Each of these Silicon Valley companies relies on cobalt for their rechargeable batteries.

The DRC supplies the world with more than 60 percent of its cobalt. A good portion is mined by subsistence miners — independent contractors who take it upon themselves to find and unearth the metal. The miners climb down shafts just wide enough for their bodies with no more than a flimsy headlamp, a hammer and a sack. If a worker gets hurt or dies, buyers take no responsibility and do not offer assistance or support. Reports by Amnesty International and The Washington Post in 2016 revealed these inhumane conditions, but little has changed for the better since then.

Young children are entering this work, often to help their families pay for the essentials needed to survive. The lawsuit’s plaintiff, labeled Jane Doe 1, reports that her nephew began working in mines to pay his $6 a month school fee. Last year, the tunnel where he was digging collapsed. The family never found his body.

The narratives documented by the lawsuit show that this boy's story is not an isolated incident.

Are small gains enough? Tech companies owe miners more.

Back in 2016, with attention coming to cobalt, Apple acknowledged its culpability — child labor is part of its supply chain. Even so, according to research by Amnesty International in 2017 measuring the due diligence of 26 companies that use cobalt in their products, Apple has done the most amongst consumer-facing computer and electronics companies to change the way it sources cobalt. In that category, Huawei, Lenovo, Microsoft and ZTE, on the other hand, performed the worst, according to that survey's data.

Apple has shown that it can identify all of its cobalt smelters and refiners, and it has taken steps to verify its suppliers’ documentation on procurement methods. The tech giant is also a member of the Responsible Cobalt Initiative, along with companies like HP and Sony. This Initiative is based on the Organization for Economic Co-operation and Development’s (OECD) Due Diligence Guidance on Responsible Supply Chains of Minerals from Conflict-Affected and High-Risk Areas — a global standard.

Despite some transparency and commitments, Amnesty International emphasizes that companies, even Apple, have not taken enough action. The report goes as far as to say, “None of the 29 companies named in this report are carrying out human rights due diligence on their cobalt supply chains in line with international standards.”

What are the options for tech firms reliant on the global cobalt supply chain?

The IRA’s lawsuit is the first tangible consequence tech companies have felt from relying on the DRC’s cobalt supplies. The damages, though, may seem like petty cash to multinational corporations like Apple and Tesla. Each of the 16 plaintiffs is claiming damages exceeding $75,000.

This suit, however, may be an omen for future costs to come. The initiative Principles for Responsible Investment, a partner with the United Nations, recommends that investors pay close attention to how cobalt comes into play in their portfolios.

“Human rights violations in the cobalt supply chain could lead to severe brand damage, negative impact on operations, and strikes and disruptions,” the group claims in its report on how investors can promote responsible sourcing of cobalt.

With pushback from lawsuits and investors, though, tech companies aren’t thrown to the wolves. They have options. One example is the Better Mining program from RCS Global Group, where mines are monitored and progress is tracked. The organization’s mines have shown demonstrable improvements in human rights, environmental ethics, community wellbeing and more. RCS provides companies a clear way to track and support the mines that feed them. Current clients include IBM, Sony and Best Buy.

Only one way forward to ensure responsible cobalt

In the case of cobalt, stepping away from DRC mines may not be possible. Cobalt is, first of all, an irreplaceable component of current reusable batteries. Furthermore, the DRC has the largest reserves of cobalt in the world at 3.4 million tons, according to NS Energy.

In addition to saving face and saving money, American companies can lead the way for the largest global cobalt consumers like China. According to many sources, China produces most of the lithium-ion batteries in the world.

The one way forward for companies that are continuing to use more cobalt each year is to take the step past data to action and actually invest in mines and methods that are supporting workers in the DRC and refusing child labor. With a lawsuit drawing closer public scrutiny to this issue, leaning on children for cobalt-procurement by accident or not may not be profitable for much longer.

Image credit: Tyler Lastovich/Unsplash

As the Chinese “Year of the Pig” comes to a close, alternative meat producers look forward to enjoying a robust year of alternative pork. The latest soy-based meat alternative will soon be served up as a plant-based sausage patty breakfast sandwich at 139 Burger King locations across the United States. After the success of the Impossible Whopper, which boosted sales and brought new customers into Burger King locations, Impossible Foods is now releasing Impossible Pork as an alternative that cooks, looks and tastes like real pork.

The rise of alternative meat stems from both supply chain issues and increasing consumer demand. Opportunistic alternative meat producers are jumping into the void caused by African Swine Fever (AFS). At the same time consumers across the globe are clamoring for food that is better for their bodies, and the environment.

AFS cut the global pork supply by 50 percent

By some estimates, AFS has killed half of all pigs in the world in recent years. The disease is far from being contained, with only experimental vaccines currently under development. But out of this crisis has emerged an opportunity for companies like Impossible Foods and other players in the plant-based protein sector including Beyond Meat.

The Good Food Institute is one nonprofit which supports plant-based companies. Caroline Bushnell, the associate director of The Good Food Institute’s corporate engagement, stated that “this current pork shortage has created a gap that the next generation of plant-based pork is perfectly poised to fill."

The pork shortage, Impossible Foods CEO Pat Brown agrees, is enticing many companies to put “a lot of effort into expanding into international markets, particularly in Asia, where pork is the dominant meat product.” In addition to the sausage patty breakfast sandwich debuting at Burger Kings in the United States, Impossible is rolling out Asian dishes from dumplings and noodles to dim sum and bao sandwiches.

Impossible Foods’ main competitor, Beyond Meat, sees the same opportunity “to produce and sell pork dumplings, for example, in Asia,” said Beyond Meat CEO Ethan Brown. He called the current opportunity “significant and not one that's lost on us.”

Rising consumer interest leads to plant-based sausage and pork

At the same time as the global pork supply is at a low, consumers are eager for more ethically-sourced food and a healthier diet.

Impossible CEO Pat Brown maintains that AFS’ impact on the pork supply chain was not the catalyst for Impossible developing plant-based pork. However, he told CNN that AFS has “exacerbated the demand for a product like ours.”

The Good Food Institute found that pork alternatives sales grew almost 15 percent in the U.S. from May 2018 to April 2019. One major vegan pork alternative is jackfruit, sales of which were up nearly 20 percent.

Consumers looking out for their own health have good reason to switch to meatless pork alternatives. Real pork sausage contains more fat and calories than Impossible Sausage, and the two have a similar quantity of protein.

While some consumers are primarily interested in their own body and health, others go meatless for the planet’s sake. Beyond Meat knows this well, as the company’s mission statement lists climate change right after human health as one of the world’s top four issues. With animal agriculture responsible for up to 15 percent of global emissions, many consumers feel meatless alternatives will allow them to align their eating habits with their personal emissions goals.

The growing plant-based meats sector

Whether consumers are motivated by a healthier diet or a livable planet, alternative meats are becoming an increasingly appetizing option to diners.

The Good Food Institute’s Bushnell predicts “an explosion in the number of plant-based pork options available over the next couple of years.” She isn’t alone, as Barclays recently predicted the sector’s sales could approach $140 billion over the next decade, or 10 percent of the global meat industry.

Image credit: Impossible Foods